MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7051696423

Priority mechanism for QoS control in CDMA system through dynamic power control

2003· dissertation· en· W7051696423 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship@McGill (McGill) · 2003
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicMagnetic confinement fusion research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMcGill University
KeywordsQuality of servicePower (physics)Control (management)Mechanism (biology)Power controlQuality (philosophy)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Future wireless systems will have to support multimedia services such as voice, data and video. Issues in providing multimedia services on wireless systems include multiple access, bandwidth rationing, scheduling and power control. In this thesis, we address the last issue. CDMA is assumed to be the access method. Each of these services has different Quality of Service (QoS) requirements, maximum power and packet time-out constraints; in order to achieve the required QoS, they can alter their transmission. In this work, we present a novel Power Control With Priority Scheduling (PCWPS) algorithm for a wireless CDMA system, which achieves reliability and efficiently control packet loss due to timeout violation for simultaneously transmitted multimedia traffic, as well as minimizing system total interference. Our power control algorithm requires information about each traffic class instant state, as well as the wireless channel condition at the beginning power update iteration. Based on this information, the optimum allocated power can be calculated through linear or nonlinear programming methods. The simulation results show that our algorithm achieves good performance in term of packet loss due to timeout.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.246 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeScholarship@McGill (McGill)→Same topicMagnetic confinement fusion research→French-language works237,207→